ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2014
Variability in assessing treatment response: metastatic colorectal cancer as a paradigm.
Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST in advanced melanoma patients treated with pembrolizumab in a phase II clinical trial.European radiology · 2021Trial
- Assessing the reliability of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST): a systematic review of the factors contributing to inter-observer variability.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Review
- Evaluating the prognostic value of radiomics and clinical features in metastatic prostate cancer using [Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2025Article
- Radiomics for Identification and Prediction in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Review of Studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Enhanced Detection of Treatment Effects on Metastatic Colorectal Cancer with Volumetric CT Measurements for Tumor Burden Growth Rate Evaluation.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe cutoff values currently used to categorize tumor response to therapy are neither biologically based nor tailored for measurement reproducibility with contemporary imaging modalities. Sources and magnitudes of discordance in response assessment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are unknown. EXPERIMENTAL
designA subset of patients' CT images of chest, abdomen, and pelvis were randomly chosen from a multicenter clinical trial evaluating insulin-like growth factor receptor type 1-targeted therapy in mCRC. Using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), three radiologists selected target lesions and measured "uni" (maximal diameter), "bi" (product of maximal diameter and maximal perpendicular diameter), and "vol" (volume) on baseline and 6-week posttherapy scans in the following ways: (i) each radiologist independently selected and measured target lesions and (ii) one radiologist's target lesions were blindly remeasured by the others. Variability in relative change of tumor measurements was analyzed using linear mixed effects models.
resultsThree radiologists independently selected 138, 101, and 146 metastatic target lesions in the liver, lungs, lymph nodes, and other organs (e.g., peritoneal cavity) in 29 patients. Of 198 target lesions total, 33% were selected by all three, 28% by two, and 39% by one radiologist. With independent selection, the variability in relative change of tumor measurements was 11% (uni), 19% (bi), and 22% (vol), respectively. When measuring the same lesions, the corresponding numbers were 8%, 14%, and 12%.
conclusionsThe relatively low variability in change of mCRC measurements suggests that response criteria could be modified to allow more accurate and sensitive CT assessment of anticancer therapy efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.